Perverse Incentives in Outsourcing Agreements

In Vested Outsourcing, Kate Vitasek and co-authors Mike Ledyard and Karl Manrodt outline the ten ailments of traditional outsource relationships. Number three on the list is the Activity Trap, which they describe as follows:

Traditionally, companies that purchase outsourced services use a transaction-based model. Under that model, the service provider is paid for every transaction — whether it is needed or not. Businesses are in the business to make money; outsource providers are no different. The more transactions performed, the more money they make. There is no incentive for the outsource provider to reduce the number of non-value-added transactions, because such a reduction would result in lower revenue.

The only incentive that often exists are perverse incentives, which the authors illustrate with this example:

Nineteenth-century paleontologists traveling to China used to pay peasants for each fragment of dinosaur bone (dinosaur fossils) they they produced. They later discovered that peasants dug up the bones and then smashed them to maximize their payments.

I was reminded of that “smashing of dinosaur bones” story when I read an article in Monday’s Wall Street Journal about Progress Rail Services (a subsidiary of Caterpillar) that inspects and repairs railcars at ports for clients such Union Pacific and BNSF. As Caterpillar revealed in a regulatory filing last November, The U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California is investigating the company for allegations that “Progress Rail conducted unnecessary or improper rail car inspections and that it failed to properly dispose of equipment, parts, tools and other items.”

The WSJ article shed some light on the investigation, based on interviews the Journal conducted with current and former employees. Here are some excerpts:

Some workers have resorted to smashing brake parts with hammers, gouging wheels with chisels or using chains to yank handles loose, according to current and former employees.


In a practice called “green repairs,” they added, workers at times have replaced parts that weren’t broken and hid the old parts in their cars out of sight of auditors. One employee said he and others sometimes threw parts into the ocean.

The article doesn’t provide any details about the structure of Progress Rail Services’ agreements with its clients, but based on the following details, it seems like they suffer from the Activity Trap and perverse incentives (emphasis mine):

Even so, they said, car men [workers that conduct the inspections] are under pressure to identify repair work to be done. The quickest way to do so, they said, was to smash something or to remove a bolt or other part and report it as missing.


They weren’t instructed to do that, the workers said. But they added that some managers made clear the workers would be replaced if they didn’t produce enough repair revenue.


Car men are expected to justify their hourly pay “and then some,” this worker said. “If you find no defects, it’s a bad night,” he added, and that creates a temptation to “break something that’s not broken.”


Current and former employees interviewed said those who found large numbers of parts to replace didn’t receive extra pay, but they tended to be favored by the supervisors and sometimes honored with employee-of-the-month recognition.

If you haven’t in a while, review your outsourcing agreements this week, specifically those with your strategic partners. Are there any perverse incentives in your outsourcing agreements? Any disincentives for your service providers to reduce transactions and simplify processes? Are you enabling the temptation to “smash dinosaur bones” in your outsourced operations?

Be Sociable, Share!

Global Supply Chain Visibility is No Easy Task

Supply chain visibility is no easy task – in fact, defining what it means can be a challenge in itself. What is your definition of supply chain visibility? Is it data visualization, business intelligence, and analytics, or is it a collaboration tool used to connect your trading partners and suppliers? The answer is not always that clear because supply chain visibility has to take on all of those roles to… Continue reading

HP’s New Style of IT: The Social Supply Chain

In a post earlier this year, I wrote that companies looking for opportunities for supply chain innovation will ultimately find them at the intersection of Software, B2B Connectivity, and Social Networking — and that Supply Chain Operating Networks are leading the way in enabling that convergence.

This trend was certainly evident at GT Nexus’ Bridges 2014 User Conference last month. There were 500+ attendees from over… Continue reading

This Week in Logistics News (July 14-18, 2014)

I am going paddleboarding with my wife this afternoon, a rare break from work to enjoy the outdoors with my best friend. I’ve only gone paddleboarding once, on a calm lake in Maine a couple of years ago, and to my great surprise and joy, I didn’t fall off. Something deep in my gut tells me, however, that I should wear my bathing suit today, and keep my phone and… Continue reading

Top 5 Questions About Keeping Transportation In-House

There is an old proverb: You never know what you have until it is gone. Is this true for your in-house transportation management department?

Why would you hand over your transportation management to someone else? There are viable reasons to outsource the system, people, or both; for example, your transportation requirements are not unique enough to staff a full department. In certain situations, allowing a firm to host the… Continue reading